The Gilded Age, the Supreme Court, and That Mental Math Some of Us Still Need to Do

Oct. 8 2025, Published 1:11 a.m. ET
I’m in a Facebook group where we watch and talk about HBO’s Gilded Age. The show is set in New York City in the early 1880s. While we eagerly wait for Season 4, we keep ourselves busy by rewatching Gilded Age from Season 1 together and sharing our thoughts. It’s funny how much more you can see when you watch an episode for the second or third time around.
Anyway, on Sunday, September 7, 2025, we rewatched Season 1, Episode 4. Bear with me. The date of the rewatch is relevant. In this episode, there’s a scene where Marian Brooks, a young White aristocrat, is walking with her Black friend, Peggy Scott. Marian sees a fancy boutique and is excited to go in to look for a shawl. Peggy, on the other hand, has a look of dread at the thought of going into that store. You see, Peggy is already calculating the likely reaction to her race by those inside that store.
Anyway, Marian goes in and Peggy follows her. Sadly, Peggy’s mental math was right on the money. While Marian was “oohing” and “aahing” over the beautiful inventory, Peggy was enduring the glares, the disdain, and animosity of the shopkeepers. It’s that silent but oh so loud message when someone does not belong. Message received.

As I was watching that scene, I felt a fleeting moment of envy. Not over Peggy’s obvious discomfort about not belonging in an affluent, White space. As a Black woman, I am familiar with that situation and the need to do a quick assessment about whether my race might cause others discomfort.No, I envied Marian and her ability to enter that shop without a thought in the world other than what kind of shawl that she wanted to buy.I envied her her freedom.It was a very fleeting moment of envy over a fictional character about something that may or may not have happened 150 years ago.Silly, right?
Ok. Fast forward. The very next day after that Gilded Age rewatch party, approximately 150 years after that fictional scene with Marian and Peggy, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Noem v. Vasquez. In that decision, the Court found, at least on an interim basis, that immigration officers in Los Angeles could use a person’s race and Spanish accent to find reasonable suspicion needed to detain the person for possible illegal immigration.Specifically, the Court stated that reasonable suspicion was met if the person: 1) looked Hispanic; 2) spoke Spanish or spoke English with a Spanish accent; 3)was standing at a bus stop or at day labor site (e.g., at a Home Depot); and/or 4) otherwise worked in a low wage job. Any combination of these elements, without more, were enough to satisfy the Fourth Amendment’s“reasonable suspicion” test.
And this made me sad. I thought about the mental freedom that other immigrants, such as (this is all hypothetical) a White person from France with a French accent, or a White person from Germany with a German accent, or a White person from Ireland with that lovely Irish accent (sorry, showing my bias here!), each of whom might have overstayed their visa and thus are in the U.S. unlawfully, but are free of the mental calculation that a person of Hispanic descent with a Spanish accent must do.
For someone with brown skin and a Spanish accent, even if they are a U.S. citizen, a trip to Home Depot might not be just about the widget that they need. Instead, they need to balance the importance of the widget against the risk of going to a place known being a target of immigration authorities. They might decide to walk with their immigration papers since the Supreme Court stated that anyone meeting these four requirements could regain their freedom by showing their papers.
So, for the hypothetical Marie-Claire with the French accent, or Juergen with the German accent, or Patrick with the Irish accent, they are free to just think of nothing but the widget that they need. And, if you also fall outside of the Supreme Court’s 4-element racial profile, there’s no need to feel guilty about the mental freedom that you have. Go get your widget! Only, recognize there are those in this country, many of whom who are here legally and might even be U.S. citizens, who do not. Let’s just be aware and acknowledge this unearned freedom that we have been afforded. Sometimes, just acknowledging the privilege that we have received is enough, as a start.

Nadine Jones is an attorney living in Jersey City with over 20 years legal practice, including serving as General Counsel to a multibillion U.S.-based company.She is currently in the consulting space and uses her corporate skills to drive big projects while always seeing the individual. Nadine delivers critical insights to heavy present-day matters in a calm, pragmatic, and empathetic manner as founder of General Counsel Support Services. She is highly active via LinkedIN and can be contacted there.